HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2008-11-13 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

VOLUNTARY EUTHANASIA BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 16 October 2008. Page 513.)

Mr KOUTSANTONIS (West Torrens) (11:24): I oppose this bill, and I oppose this bill not only on the grounds of my personal beliefs—and I understand the member for Fisher has gone on radio and condemned members of parliament who vote in here based on their personally held views and claimed that members of parliament were voting based on instructions either from Rome or their church, which I personally found offensive.

The Hon. R.B. Such: That is untrue. I never said that.

Mr KOUTSANTONIS: And I have the transcript.

The Hon. R.B. SUCH: Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I seek leave to make a personal explanation.

The SPEAKER: You can only do that when there is an interruption or a break in proceedings. You cannot do that now.

The Hon. R.B. SUCH: I will do so at the first opportunity. The member's comments are incorrect.

Mr KOUTSANTONIS: The member for Fisher went on radio and said that members of parliament should vote in accordance with the views of their electorate and not their own personally held views. I have made my views known on these moral issues from day one. There is not a person in my electorate who is interested in these issues who does not know my personal views. I put them to the people every four years. The idea that I take instructions from my church or that I represent my church here rather than my electorate, I find offensive.

I do not for a moment ridicule the intentions and good intentions of the member for Fisher in the conduct of his duty in bringing this bill. I believe he is a passionate advocate for voluntary euthanasia. I am a passionate advocate in opposition to voluntary euthanasia. I do not condemn his intentions; I do not condemn his motives. I attack the idea, not the proponent of the idea. That is the difference. I will put on the record that I think the member for Fisher is a man of great integrity and an excellent servant of his constituents, and I think he has served them well and shown a fiery independence, as have I. The idea—

Mr Hanna interjecting:

Mr KOUTSANTONIS: On these issues. If the member for Mitchell thinks it is easy to be in a party and hold views that are different from the majority of members of the party on moral issues, I can tell him that it is not.

Mr Hanna: There is always something you can do about it.

Mr KOUTSANTONIS: Unlike the member for Mitchell, I am Labor to my bootstraps. I will just say this about voluntary euthanasia. Basically, the member for Fisher is asking the government to administer a system of deploying the termination of life. During my 11 years in this place, I have witnessed government run agencies, and can I just say that, with all due respect to our current ministers, previous ministers and previous governments, I would not trust a government department to run the administration of death.

Human error occurs: it is not intentional, but you cannot legislate away human error. We find it difficult to administer water bills sometimes; we find it difficult to administer accident and emergency wards. We do these things with good intentions. We pour in resources and efforts—and in my personal humble view, this government has done more than most—to address those issues, but mistakes are still made and they are made by humans.

I do not know of any politician who can guarantee that, under a system of legalised voluntary euthanasia, someone will not be euthanased against their wishes. Let us say zero out of 100 are carried out perfectly. Let us say that zero out of 500 are carried out perfectly—family's wishes, patient's wishes: it is all done properly. What about that one example of someone who, because of their language skills, cannot communicate, an ambiguous will, an overcrowded hospital, or guilt being forced on the family about the suffering their father, mother, grandparent or son is experiencing without that son, parent or grandparent being able to communicate their personal wishes?

What if on that one occasion the state authorises the death of a person who has committed no crime and their life is taken? That is the reason I oppose the death penalty, even though, member for Fisher, an overwhelming majority of my constituents support the death penalty. They support capital punishment, yet every election I go to them and say, 'I oppose capital punishment for even the most heinous of crimes because the state cannot ever guarantee that an innocent person will not be put to death.' It is irreversible.

The Hon. R.B. Such: What was Mr Rudd's position on the Bali bombers?

Mr KOUTSANTONIS: I am not Mr Rudd. The member for Fisher has to be very careful when he passes judgment on radio on other members of parliament and the way they vote. I am happy to be judged on my votes in this parliament based on my speeches and on what I believe, but the idea that I take orders from my church, my local parish priest or any authority other than my own on how I vote on these issues is offensive.

Debate adjourned.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT